Review of Barriers to Engaging Black and Minority Ethnic Groups in Physical Activity in the United Kingdom
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction and Objective: The lower physical activity levels in Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) groups as comparedwith general population in the United Kingdom (UK) could relate to barriers to engaging these groups in physicalactivity. Hence, the aim to conduct a review to examine UK primary studies reporting barriers to engaging BME groupsin physical activity. Method: This is a narrative review of literature from 1970 to 2008. The search looked for Englishliterature from five bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsyINFO, Ethnicity and Health). Broadsearch terms ‘physical activity and minority’ were used and views from BME groups were considered in this review.Results & Conclusion: The search yielded 391 studies and 18 were finally included in the review. Our review identified20 barriers clustered among four broad themes of: (a) perceived personal barriers; (b) socio-economic barriers; (c)cultural barriers; and (d) environmental barriers. Overcoming these barriers in these broad areas is important indevelopment of sensitive multicultural health promotion addressing physical inequalities.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".